About your Search

20130318
20130326
STATION
MSNBCW 27
CSPAN 13
CSPAN2 6
KQED (PBS) 6
KRCB (PBS) 4
KNTV (NBC) 3
CNNW 1
LANGUAGE
English 70
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 70 (some duplicates have been removed)
schools of thought on how to deal with israel. mark perry is a foreign policy analyst who remains close contact with the hamas leadership. >> abu mazen has gambled very explicitly and said very explicitly that there will be no violence against israel and he will negotiate in good faith with israel. the problem is that hasn't gotten him anywhere. hamas has a totally different approach and their approach is resistant. they believe israel will only come to the table when they feel pain. >> warner: a bring number of palestinians see justification for that belief. last november a week of palestinian rocket fire from gaza and israeli air strikes led to an egyptian-brokered cease-fire between hamas and israel. as part of that, some israeli restrictions on gaza were eased. the year before, hamas secured the release of a thousand prisoners from israeli jails in return for handing over gilad shalit, the israeli soldier it kidnapped in 2006. >> it has sent a clear message to the palestinian people if you abduct soldiers the they will be released but if you sign agreements about w us about releasin
. >> dick cheney was a trained foreign policy expert. so was colin powell. >> indeed, the facts and iraq's behavior show that saddam hussein and his regime are concealing their efforts to produce more weapons of mass destruction. >> the national debate over going to war in iraq was heavily lopsided in favor of war. in the united states senate, the war resolution passed with 77 votes, only 23 senators opposed it, including only one republican rhode island senator rink on chafee. >> what concerns me most is the pattern we see applied to iraq, that is abandoning of our alliances and willing to be preemptive without any real evidence of weapons of mass destruction. >> in the house of representatives the war resolution passed with 296 votes. 133 house members voted against it, including a congresswoman from san francisco who was working her way up the leadership ladder. >> let's do what is proportionate, appropriate, which mitigates risk for our young people, another cost in addition to human lives, cost to terrorism and cost to the economy and another cost to our budget. this cost can be unl
-american. they are rational and we marched off in to the two foreign-policy debacles of the 20th and early 21st century. robert mcnamara, secretary of defense 30 years later spoke of his regret that we have been able to listen. he said it was a failure of the imagination to realize a french are the best informed westerners on vietnam and we didn't take them seriously because we send to didn't have an interest. as the book recounts, i would to the french archives to look at what was going on in the french foreign ministry. they have no culture in their insignificant. but they said as they analyze intelligence from vietnam 17,000 french citizens they are. exiles in paris and they try to share with us. we couldn't here because it is confusing concept we have. >> host: professor friedman a month of been times in there's another anti-nation type feelings? anti-british empire come anti-roman empire? >> guest: indeed. does the right question to ask because it should be to the use of the term we have in the court age of the british empire. perdition officials talk about anglo phobia to explain why they encount
'll come back and talk more about that and what it meant fo american foreign policy going forward. we continue our discussion on this tenth anniversary of the iraqi war with the distinguished panel of people who observed and written about the war sinces beginning. from cambridge, glrngd john burns, the london bureau chief of the "new york times." in new york, michael gordon, chiefch military correspondent r the "new york times." fouad ajami, a senior fellow of the hoomp institution. dexter filkins of the "new yorker" we hope will be joining us shortly. i go back to michael gordon.ly tell me what the judgment of history will be about our participation in the iraqi war. >> i think too much attentionwa has been paid to the decision tc go to war and not enough on the management of the withdrawal from iraq and where we go from here with iraq. because the story of iraq is not over. and we shouldn't just put thisov chapter behind us and say we're done with it. there were opportunities to be engaged with iraq by the u.s. government on the level of common citizens. there's a tbalt for influenc
, and what it means for american foreign policy.me joining me is michael gordon.jo he is chief military correspondent for the "new york times." his new book is called "end game: theis inside story of the struggle for iraq." i am pleased to have him here back a this table. welcome. good to see you. >> glad to be here. >> rose: this is, many are say, the detailed history from t the military point of view of the iraqi war. is that a fair assessment? >> well, it-- i started out to do, that but actually, i did a little more than that in this sense-- i had a coauthor, general trainer -- a >> who you worked with before. >> i started out to do a book on the surge which i had covered before the surge, during the surge, and after the surge, onng the ground inraq, and i concluded you couldn't really evaluate the surge until youal knew what was policy was before the surge and you couldn't evaluate whether the surge worked or didn't until you found out what happened afterwards. it became kind of a political military. and one thing i did try to do which a lot of american authors haven't done, frankl
years. the president spoke out on that amidst all the other busy stuff he was doing on foreign policy this week. and he said even after nearly two and a half years, a minority of senators continued to block a simple up or down vote on her nomination. the d.c. circuit has more vacancies than any other appeals court. yet we know this doesn't get a lot of attention. do you think there is any. >> to put more pressure on this do nothing congress? >> it is unlikely she will come back up. what is happening here is that this is part of the conservative cause on judicial nominations. they're made about what happened during the bush years when democrats blocked a landful of very conservative judicial nominees. in some respects, this might be payback. what could obama do? he can try another couple of judicial nominations. the bottom line is he needs to clear these judicial nominations with at least a handful of republicans. otherwise if they're too liberal, they will get filibustered. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >>> up next, a huge week ahead for gay rights as the supremes take up two
big dinners as secretary of state, in addition to all of the foreign policy personalities, there were always a few big donors who were sprinkled in and they won't forget it when it comes time in 2015 to begin. chris: hosting a show from berlin, from germany, another event given at the state department with her supporters and the obama supporters was at the white house, you're right. >> she is good at keeping that large group of people who would support her campaign involved, interested, and potentially ready to go. chris: anybody think she is not running? that's it, you just heard it, when we come back, "scoops and [ boy 1 ] hey! that's the last crescent. oh, did you want it? yea we'll split it. [ female announcer ] made fresh, so light, buttery and flakey. that's half that's not half! guys, i have more! thanks mom [ female announcer ] pillsbury crescents. let the making begin here's a better idea. pillsbury grands! flaky layers biscuits in just 15 minutes the light delicate layers add a layer of warmth to your next dinner. pillsbury grands biscuits let the making begin. chris: welcom
, in addition to all of the foreign policy personalities, there were always a few big donors who were sprinkled in and they won't forget it when it comes time in 2015 to begin. chris: hosting a show from berlin, from germany, another event given at the state department with her supporters and the obama supporters was at the white house, you're right. >> she is good at keeping that large group of people who would support her campaign involved, interested, and potentially ready to go. chris: anybody think she is not running? that's it, you just heard it, when we come back, "scoops and chris: welcome back. david, tell me something i don't know. >> the united states has been secretly training syrian rebel forces in jordan, but there is one big problem. the syrian rebels don't want to leave syria to get the training, which means that to make this program work, it's a good program, the u.s. is going to have to go inside syria. chris: ok. >> wow, that's good. i can't top that. as you know, the g.o.p. has conducted an auto autopsy to try to figure out what happened in the last election. all they have d
for the opposite. >> i would argue that a more restrained policy is the true conservative foreign policy as it includes two tenants of true conservatism. respect and fiscal discipline. instead of large land wars, we would, when necessary, target our enemy and strike with lethal force. >> when it comes to watching change shift, think about national security. national security was at the heart and soul of the republican party at least for about a generation and a half and democrats owned the national security issue for years. republican his to rely on general in order to gain credibility on foreign policy issues in the 50s. it took the vietnam war and then the iran hostage situation for democrats to lose that. republicans and bush and iraq lost that and it hurt the party and still hasn't recovered ever since. lots of people lost lives. the political impact is something that history should not ignore in this country. mr. russert, back to you. i will see you live tomorrow. >> thank you, chuck. this friday catch the msnbc documentary hubris: selling the iraq war, with our own rachel maddow. f
on the syria situation and other foreign policy challenges. joining me tonight is the chairman of the house intelligence committee, congressman mike rogers. mr. chairman, thank you for being here. >> thank you for having me. >> bret: let's start in syria. what do we know about the possibility of chemical weapons being used there? >> if you take the whole body of work, from the intelligence reports over the last two years, i believe it's highly probable that chemical weapons were used at least in some small amounts in syria. which is in violation of the chemical weapons convention. >> bret: now, foreign policy magazine, they have this quote. syrian support group, s.s.g., the only american organization licensed by the u.s. government to send money directly to the fsa, which is on the ground in syria, issued a press release yesterday claiming the gas that killed civilians in separate instances, two separate instances near me das cuss was a chemical agent similarlant found -- schismlant found in pesticide. it causes similar effects like muscle, nerve, respiratory death. >> do you believe it's t
that chemical agents have been used. senator lindsey graham spoke about the allegations telling foreign policy that quote this. we need to come up with a plan to secure these weapons sites either in conjunction with our partners or, if nothing else, by ourselves. if the choice is to send in troops to secure the weapons sites versus allowing chemical weapons to get in the hands of some of the most violent people in the world, i vote to cut this off before it becomes a problem. but following intelligence briefings, the chairs of both the house and senate intelligence committee said they believe president bashar al assad has crossed the so-called red line in the civil war. >> i think the days are becoming mow desperate. the regime is more desperate. we know where the chemical weapons are. there's no secret that they are there. i think the probabilities are very high that we are going into some very dark times and i think the white house needs to be prepared. >> i have a high probability to believe that chemical weapons were used. we need that final verification but given everything we know over t
spotlight on magazine series. he writes about the role of congress in u.s. foreign policy. we will also take your calls, e- mails, and host: good morning, and welcome to the washington journal. the federal reserve chairman holds his news conference with .eporters u.s. aid officials testify on syria. the commerce panel hears from ,he faa about sequestration and a hearing on domestic use of drones. all those events and more on c- span.org. 10 years ago today marks the us- led invasion into iraq. that is where we begin this morning to get your take on the 10th anniversary. here are the numbers -- host: send us a tweet or post your comments on facebook. we will get to your phone calls in just a minute. is the us from baghdad pentagon correspondent for the washington post. begin with your headline this morning. at least 60 are killed in iraq on tuesday. what happened, and is this a pattern? guest: it has been the deadliest day since u.s. troops have pulled out. an al qaeda group took responsibility for this wave of bombings, and said it was doing so to seek revenge from the government. hearing si
there was a role in america's foreign policy. he wants america to pull back. he pointed to a split within the republican party on national security before almost anybody else did. he really actually outlined some of the divisions. when you look at his policies what he stands for, abolishing the departments of education, commerce, trade, the federal reserve. i think when he gets more out there in the public, when he's not just giving a talk at cpac, i just think that what he says is going to be too extreme for members of the republican party who support still the hawkish line of american involvement in the world and i think for clearly when he gets into i think into middle america, for running for anything like a presidential nomination that would be a very tricky position, some of those domestic issues, too. >> eugene, this is coming at a time that the gop is trying to reconfigure, the autopsy, what do you do to a corpse to bring it back to life? there are specific policy recommendations, raines preeb is's document. one was about gay marriage and one was about immigration. how do you move
has been crossed. and graham tell s "foreign policy's" josh rogen, we need to come up with a plan to secure these weapon sites either in conjunction with our partners or, if nothing else, by ourselves. what's your reaction to today's developments? >> well, if these reports are corroborated, martin, clearly the situation in syria, which you know you and i have talked about for at least two years, it indicates that, and as we all know, these weapons are not under lock and key. i had revealed in a piece that, indeed, they had been put under control of the besiege and elements of the iranians, revolutionary guards for safekeeping. given the fact hezbollah and any number of terrorist organizations are lurking around one corner or the next of any syrian city, who knows what's going on there. there's no guarantee anyone has control over these weapons. the fact of the matter is putting boots on the ground at this point is not going to solve the problem of where these wmd stockpiles go. >> dana, this has an eerie echo of that other despotic leader, saddam hussein, who used chemical weapons
'hanlon director of research and a senior of foreign policy fellow at the brookings institution. >> thank you. >> that sound that we played for the president's speech today, is what we heard a fair response to the criticism that the president hasn't acted aggressively enough? >> well it's a very fair way of looking at the theory. in theory any military operation sound appealing when you're frustrated by what you're watching and you want to make a difference. the president is certainly right to remember that when you get involved, you know, it's hard to get out and even if you start providing arms to the rebels, you implicate yourself in a way that it mayes in estate escalation. i agree that we should be arming the rebels and i consider nato arab league and combined air strikes in support of it, but i understand the president's reluctance so far. i think it's about time, though, we re-assess. you've written extensively on military options for syria. is it your view that the united states should enact an air operation? because one of assad's greatest advantages over the rebels, as you know, is
next, house foreign affairs committee chairman ed royce talks about u.s. policy towards the asia-pacific region including u.s. relations with china and north korea's nuclear program. then former national security adviser brzezinski discusses the situation in iraq at a forum marking the tenth anniversary of the war. and later, former state and treasury department officials discuss the orange of the islamic militant -- origin of the islamic militant group hezbollah and its global terrorist threat. >> also today retired general john allen who commanded forces in afghanistan discusses the progress of the war during his command and the future mission of the u.s. and nato in the country. general allen led the forces in afghanistan for 19 months from mid 2011 through february of this year. he'll be hosted by the brookings institution, and you can see his remarks live later in this morning at 10 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> tonight on "first ladies," called a bigamist and adulterer during her husband's 1828 presidential campaign, rachel jackson chis of an -- dies of an apparent heart attac
on that journey with. that is trying to figure out what our foreign policy is. i have had a very hard time doing that. i am stumped on the answer in syria. i do not know what the answer is. we have waited so long to really do anything. it reminds me of iran in 2009 and we saw an opportunity against the regime. i find ourselves in a situation now where i do feel like we are reacting to this situation and if we go back to the beginning of the conflict and the net -- and the initial uprising of assad, you have the iran receive supporting the syrian regime on the one hand, and syrian fighter -- freedom fighters on the other hand. at that time, you could assume extremism would not have the ability to organize to this -- to the great extent they probably organize now. at the beginning, and i am asking yolks because you're at -- asking you because you were at these compositions, against a regime that is a supported obama -- supported by iran? i will keep it short because there is a lot i want to ask. >> to be very brief, congressman, i, personally, do not agree we waited so long. we were helping democr
's development a schism in the foreign policy and mitt romney would indeed lead us down the road to another catastrophic, this time with iran. >> having been there while it was going so wrong, seeing it up close, when you think about our governance, do you think there's something that we can do now as a country to try to make it right, to fix the harm we did to ourselves as a country, not just politically. is there any kind of way we can fix the strategic error of that war internally and internationally? >> i think it boils down to the american people. i would like to say there's institutional change we could make statutorily or otherwise. i would like to say that we could elect different people. i would like to say all manner of things that would be easier to do, but i think the bottom line is the american people have got to get angry and they've got to start doing things, local things, state things, national things, whatever they can find or think to do. i was in great neck, new york, talking to a synagogue group this last weekend, and i'll tell you that all those people were war weary an
to make it seem like the war in iraq thing was actually a great idea and not the worst foreign policy disaster in maybe a century. there's paul wolfowitz defending it over the weekend, and michael oh han lon. and donald rumsfeld saying ten years ago began the long difficult work of liberating 25 million iraqis, all who played a roll in history deserve our respect and appreciation. the nervous thing is that he has the gall to use the word history and saying it was all about liberating the iraqi people. they're trying to do it. they're using the tenth year anniversary of the war to make you believe it didn't happen the way it happened. to try to make you believe it was all about liberating the iraqi people from the tyrant. they want you to believe what they proposed to the american people ten, will he have enyears ago, go liberate them from a tyrant. the american said we should, and we went and were greeted as lib ray tors, we knew it would take eight and a half years and cost millions and lose many people. they say it was hard but that difficult liberate work is what we signed up for a
of his top strategic foreign policy advisors and he assumes because that is the sentence that is focused on that is what he wants to come out of the press conference. >> bret: next up, the two leaders on syria and the developing situation with the possibility of chemical weapons. ♪ looking for a litter with natural ingredients that helps neutralize odors. discover tidy cats pure nature. uniquely formulated with cedar, pine, and corn. >>> i am deeply skeptical of any claim in fact it was the opposition that used chemical weapons. i made clear that use of chemical weapons is a game changer. i won't make an announcement today about the next steps because we have to gather the facts. when you start seeing weapons that can cause potential devastation, and mass casualties, a you let that genie out of the bottle, then you are looking potentially at especially more horrific scenes than we have already seen in syria. >> bret: president obama talking about the possibility of the chemical weapons were used in syria. the house intelligence chairman mike rogers says there is a high probably now the
that he exported to sudan. >> what is remarkable to me is the fact that the conservative foreign policy establishment, almost in toto, continues to defend the decision to go to war, there has been no big mea culpas. but the core group, dan senor, bill crystal, wolfowitz, all of those people, none of them have come clean and said, look, what we did was wrong. >> and i think it's important, a lot of democrats didn't call him on it and i think that's why they got away. i remember when i ran for president in 2004, i was controversial at the convention because i attacked bush and everyone said don't do that. chris hayes, thank you for your time tonight and congratulations on your move to 8:00 p.m. >> it's going to be fun. >> and watch "hubris" here on msnbc at 9:00 p.m. eastern tonight, followed by "talking hubris" with chris hayes. [ female announcer ] switch to swiffer wetjet, and you'll dump your old mop. but don't worry, he'll find someone else. ♪ who's that lady? ♪ who's that lady? ♪ sexy lady ♪ who's that lady? [ female announcer ] used mops can grow bacteria. swiffer wetjet st
. >> shepard: let's bring in michael ohandlan. specialeess in defense and foreign policy. >> hi. >> shepard: where are we now in this conflict? >> i think you and jonathan have been summarizing it well. you can say the insurgents have some momentum but everytime you feel like you make that case they suffer a setback or we're remind of their fractious nature, and the regime is still get can weapons from iran and i'm not seeing we're seeing a shift in. i it's a stalemate with successes on either side. the insurgents are doing a little better but not persuasive they'll take the country or drive assad from power. i hope sew but have not seen enough evidence. this could be a settling into a long situation in which the government holds some neighborhoods, the insurgents hold others and it keeps going for a very long time. >> with the president's trip to israel, the jordan, toothier talking to turkey, and then secretary kerry's trip to iraq, get the idea there's some consensus about what to do next. >> that's a fair point. i think you have been tracking this very well, and you also are aware of th
knew when talking about politician that is didn't know or knew, we knew. i was in u.s. foreign policy undergrad at the time and screaming at top of my lungs this is a lie this is a lie. certainly hillary clinton is not the president today because she couldn't see what we could all see. >> not going to stop her from being president in four years. >> no, and i don't agree that's why she's not president today. >> why didn't she get the nomination? >> she got beat, she got trumped and it had nothing to do with the positions on the war, really didn't. i take your point, i really do and i don't want to overly defend her. >> i'm a hillary fan. >> is that why hillary's not president? >> no, i just think that so many people wanted a black man rather than a woman in power like they were first in line. >> well, i guess we could debate it all night. zerlina maxwell and lauren windsor, thank you all for your great insights. cheap is good. and sushi, good. but cheap sushi, not so good. it's like that super-low rate on not enough car insurance. pretty sketchy. ♪ ♪ and then there are
is for a generation republicans dominated politics on three issues -- foreign policy, taxes, and social issues. among social issues, they won the battle and lost the war. there is no single social issue in your favor going forward. on taxes, you stand for giving breaks to the rich. and on foreign policy, they did not support the bush foreign policy, so the issues that made that republican party dominant, all three issues are in democratic favor. until you deal with these problems, it does not matter what network you have. economic conservatives and smaller government, less intrusion, and with they will have to figure out how to mollify the social movement. >> i do not think anyone has suggested the only thing that republicans are waiting right now is doing any better databases and do we need more storefront offices. i was responding to a question directly about that. there is a lot of discussion going on right now about positioning, policies, looking for some of integrating new program pauses, how do we explain our policies better. i do not accept the premise that there is no doubt when you look at t
whether it's on the road with the secretary of state or here in washington where i cover foreign policy, and that's what motivated me to write "the secretary," to sort of take a step back and digest everything i had seen and learned. i had learned a lot being in this front row seat to history, to diplomacy. watching all those different events unfold. and writing book was a very maturing experience as well as i digested, as you say, some of what i had seen and tried to come to some of the conclusions that i was trying to get at. but when it comes to the secretary of state and the people around her, i think that what i found striking is her ability to stay focused at all times as much as possible on what is happening. she doesn't get distracted by the details if they're not important. obviously, details often matter. but she has an ability to stay focused on the big picture. how is what is happening in afghanistan impacting what they might be doing in the middle east? how is what is happening in the middle east impacting what they're trying to do in asia? i think she had a good sense of w
of the president's bigger failures on foreign policy of the first term in office. though it's a failure that he didn't necessarily have a lot of control over. at the beginning of his first term, the president declared with great fanfare he wouldn't follow the lead of his predecessors presidents clinton and bush and wait until a second term to push for middle east peace. >> we're not going to wait until the end of my administration to deal with palestinian and israeli peace. we're going to start now. >> instead, not only did the peace process go nowhere, it's actually taken a step back. when the president sets off for israel on tuesday, he travels with very low expectations. that's probably the bit of good news. from the outset the president pressed israel hard on what a two-state solution would look like. >> israelis must acknowledge that just as israel's right to exist cannot be denied, neither can palestine's. the united states does not accept the legitimacy of continued israeli settlements. it is time for these settlements to stop. >> president obama's relationship with israeli prime ministe
is traveling to israel in his first foreign policy trip since winning re-election. tomorrow he'll met with israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu. topping the agenda, iran's nuclear ambitions. thursday he will meet with mahmoud abbas. then friday it's on to jordan for meetings with king abdullah before returning back to washington on saturday. we'll be right back. [ birds chirping ] i'm your hot water heater. you hardly know i exist. that's too bad. 'cuz if my pressure relief valve gets stuck... [ booooooom! ] ...we hot water heaters can transform into rocket propelled wrecking balls. and if you got the wrong home insurance coverage, it's your bank account that might explode. so get allstate. [ dennis ] good hands. good home. make sure you have the right home protection. talk to an allstate agent. work the camera... work it! those hands. oooh la la! what's your secret? dawn? [ female announcer ] dawn hand renewal with olay beauty improves the look and feel of hands in 5 uses. love it, or get double your money back. >>> welcome back to "hardball." of all the ways the iraq war was so
armed services committee. chairman carl levin, democrat of michigan told foreign policy.com's josh rogan he wants to see the u.s. help establish a no-fly zone over syria. lindsey graham republican senator from south carolina called for u.s. boots on the ground. quote we need to come up with a plan to secure these weapon sites either in conjunction with our partners or if nothing else by ourselves. graham told josh rogan. you have got to get on the ground. i don't care what it takes. the white house held firm today saying its policy for now is that it will not be providing any lethal aid to the rebels. shep? >> shepard: james rosen at the white house tonight. well, a mixed day on wall street as investors around the world obviously eyed the island nation of cyprus where lawmakers rejected a controversial plan to qualify for a bailout. the dow made up for early losses and closed up but just four points. the nasdaq fell 8 the s&p off close to four. meantime markets in europe dropped over fears that the government of cyprus would tap into people's savings accounts. just reach in and get money
. >>> tonight president obama is traveling to israel in his first foreign policy trip since winning re-election. tomorrow he'll met with israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu. topping the agenda, iran's nuclear ambitions. on thursday the president will tour the west bank and meet with mahmoud abbas, president of the palestinian authority. then friday it's on to jordan for meetings with king abdullah before returning back to washington on saturday. we'll be right back. [ engine sputters ] [ dennis ] allstate wants everyone to be protected on the road. whether you're an allstate customer or not. all you have to do is call. [ female announcer ] call and sign up for good hands roadside assistance today. [ dennis ] are you in good hands? >>> welcome back to "hardball." of all the ways the iraq war was sold to the american people under false pretense, one of the most galling was we could win this war on the cheap both in lives and in treasure. a new report from brown university, the cost of war study, proves just how wrong that early promise was. the cost in lives was of course overwhelm
. not to apologize for their role in arguably the worst foreign policy disaster and deception in a century, but to say actually it wasn't a disaster or a decepti deception, it was a great idea and they're not sorry and everything worked out great. >> you try to do everything you can diplomatically, without resort to force, but our history is replete with examples where ultimately we had to use force. >> and the argument this was a war you wanted? >> wanted? why, because we like war? i did what i did. it's all on the public record. and i feel very good about it. if i had to do it over again, i would do it in a minute. >> i feel very good about it. what's there to feel bad about? one of dick cheney's main cohorts in selling the iraq war to the american people was this guy, deputy defense secretary paul wolfowits, her was his contribution to the discussion this
: joining me martin indyk, director of foreign policy brookings institution, also a former u.s. ambassador to israel. and itamar rabinovich served as israel ambassador to the united states. at the same time he was chief negotiator with the syrian government and president and founder of the israeli institute. i'm pleased to have both of them at this table, at this time, when the president i saying some very interesting things in israel. so welcome. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> rose: characterize this speech by the president. >> this speech was typical obama at his best, working his oratorical magic on a crowd that lapped it up. he spoke very convincingly about his commitment to israel's security and his understanding of their security dilemmas. and particularly underlined what he was going to prevent iran from getting nuclear weaponsment buthen he went into a rif about peace and the necessity of peace and the possibility of peace, and why peace has to be just, even saying put yourself, you israelis put yourself in the shoes of the palestinians. and talked over the heads of the leadership
factor in foreign policy decisions of both democratic and republican administrations for years to come. what do you think? >> i wouldn't necessarily agree, because, you know, in vietnam we said as the colonel said we learned our lesson but we didn't learn a lesson in the iraq war. even now, the same warhawks are saying we should be in syria. we should go and bomb iran. so i feel as if there is a premise we should be more isolated, that's not the temperature of the republican party for the most part, besides rand paul, who is separate. that's a shame. because we as a country should always be the reluctant warrior. when you look back now to the ten-year anniversary of the iraq war to know this war was started as you mentioned, chris, because the bush administration said there was weapons of mass destruction, and because they said there was a connection with 9/11, neither of which were true and our intelligence agency said to the administration this isn't true yet they still moved forward at the cost of over 4400 americans losing their lives. >> almost 4500 american troops killed. at leas
it all up, it's probably $2 trillion to $3 trillion of american costs, distorted american foreign policy. the idea that we took so much of our situation after the end of the cold war and we devoted it to iraq given everything else we could've, should've done. historians will scratch their head and say why did the united states get so distracted and distorted -- >> and stayed there after we knew there weren't weapons. >> and that's the big lesson we should draw from this in afghanistan. we've got to respect local realities. united states cannot go around the middle east and remake it in our liking. we've got to have a degree of humility about the limits of our influence. and you asked whether we learned the lessons. with vietnam, iraq and afghanistan, i hope we've learnlearn ed. >> and iraq and afghanistan. first of all, be far, far more skeptical than most of us were going in to iraq. also, no matter how far you are down the path, if it's the wrong path, turn around. and we should've done that. i want to read what you talked about the human cost. mike barnicle e-mailed me this last night
magazine, he writes about the role of congress in u.s. foreign policy. we will also take your calls and e-mails and tweets. each morning at seven eastern on c-span. >> 70,000 people have died since the protest of bashar al-assad and syria. there was a hearing on thursday. live coverage starts at 9:45 a.m. eastern on c-span3. >> 34 years ago today, we began providing televised access to the everyday workings of congress and the federal government. the c-span networks were created by america's cable companies in 1979 and brought to you you as a public service by your television provider. >> edward demarco, the director of the federal housing finance agency testified on tuesday on the state of the housing market. and the future of fannie mae and freddie mac. this is two hours and 40 minutes. [inaudible conversations] >> the committee will come to order it without objection. the chair has authorized recess of the committee. at any time, the chair recognizes himself for two minutes for an opening statement. i would like to start off quoting from our witnesses testimony. few of us can imagine i
, the president's approval on handling foreign policy is more or less the split 46% approve, 40% disapprove. he was in the country 11 times over the last decade. here is a sample. >> here is the main palace, the living quarters. it was struck in the first 36 hours of war. it is in this courtroom that he could face justice. he could be in this very chair on trial before the judicial system that he controlled and manipulated for 35 years. reporter: members of the iraqi government say they will likely keep the arc of victory as a reminder of just how brutal saddam hussein really was. jenna: we are so used to seeing him and not drill. >> a long time and a few pounds ago. jenna: what are your reflections? >> my first time was with secretary rumsfeld in iraq. really from 9/11 onward. on the first trip, it was in a bus like a giant fishbowl. a glass bus going down the middle of baghdad. there was not an insurgency. we didn't have jackets on as we worked through baghdad. that dramatically changed over time, as you know. it really exploded to the point surge that was implemented under general betray pet
. it was a name juror foreign policy objective of the obama administration when he came in. special envoy grossman who took mr. holbrooke's place when he passed away had a principle mission to do that but those negotiations broke down because one, the karzai government was not involved, pakistan was not involved and the various influential groups inside afghanistan were also not involved. the fact that karzai is beginning the initiative i don't see anything wrong with that. i think it's the beginning of a very long process which is also troubled by the opposition that the factions have and the strong views. i mean people in afghanistan do not want the taliban to take control of any of the population inside of afghanistan after a negotiated settlement to be sure. jenna: you mentioned the factions though. it was interesting doing a little research for this segment i realize the state department does not list the taliban as a terrorist organization. there are different taliban-related groups, for example, a taliban, i want to call it a sector, a taliban group in pakistan that is listed as a terrorist
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 70 (some duplicates have been removed)